Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2.5 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Hi! I bought a Roland HP-305 1 year ago and I'm happy with it. I chose it because I liked the action (although it's a bit light) and I loved the dynamic expression range, resonance, decay, etc. of Supernatural engine.

But there is something I can't really understand. Why the speakers produce that muffled, dull sound? It's true that Roland sound isn't by default as bright as Yamaha or kawai but with headphones the sound is brighter than from speakers. But playing with speakers I have a better playing sensation (despite the muffleness). And outside the player perspective I thing the sound is a bit better.

Do you have any thoughts about this? Must Roland use another brand speakers? Thanks!

I had the HP-307 for a little while. The sound through speakers really lacked clarity. It sounded fantastic from across the room or even from another room but for the player the experience was quite poor. Disappointing given that it was Roland's flagship console digital at the time.

Try adding another set of speakers (with a subwoofer) to your piano and keep them small so you can set two of them on top of the cabinet (left and right) as the subwoofer can go under the piano to the left side of the pedals which will resonate into the bass end side of the keyboard.

These are not the cheap computer-style speakers you find with many desktop computer systems, they are high quality satellites with real tweeter horns and midrange speakers and have excellent clarity and range. Combined with the powerful subwoofer the total output is 200 watts, with 70 watts in the two satellites (at 35 watts each) and 130 watts for the subwoofer.

As per pv88, I wonder what it sounds like to you using external speakers? There is a difference in tone, brightness and clarity between Yamaha, Kawai and Roland, so it's either that or just poor speakers and enclosure in the Roland.

On my HP-505, which I expect to be almost like your 307 (according to technical data), I always change the sound settings for Ambience and Brilliance, depending if practicing with headphones, or playing with the speaker system. And additionally I change from time to time according to my daily feelings the "Soundboard" parameter, which in my words could also be called the 'Attack'. For this one I give you the setting as I statistically use it most of the time.

You can see, that I maximize the brilliance for the speaker system, but keep the attack reduced. I am then very happy with this settings!I am still very unsure about how I want the Damper Resonance parameter set. I like the subtle extra 'reverb' which it adds to the sound, but I donÂ´t like the clarity I loose.

In my experience with SN, there seems to be an optimal volume level that produces great sound (this may have to do with the built-in speakers). If I lower volume below this optimal level, it is not just the volume that gets lower but sound quality also degrades somewhat...muffled as you said. If the volume gets too loud, then it starts sounding like...digital.

I completley agree to what Man of La Mancha has said, I observe the same.And I made the test after reading the HP-series threads of the last days. Yes, it sounds better if you are somewhere in the room than sitting right in front of it, if letting the DP recorder play at lower volumes.

I confirm above statements. The external speaker sound of HP505 is poor, at least for the person in front of the keys. Roland would do better to place the speakers in front of the piano. For the middle domain there is more a diffuse, none controlled muffled sound. If there is a cavity behind the piano, this sound can becomes easily boomy. I bought the piano for the sound using headphones and I was conscious if I would ones like to play any piano of the HP series w/o headphones, I have to buy new monitors. Therefore my decision was for the HP505 which is the cheapest piano with a premier action, that saves me money for a later point to substitute the internal speakers.

Try adding another set of speakers (with a subwoofer) to your piano and keep them small so you can set two of them on top of the cabinet (left and right) as the subwoofer can go under the piano to the left side of the pedals which will resonate into the bass end side of the keyboard.

These are not the cheap computer-style speakers you find with many desktop computer systems, they are high quality satellites with real tweeter horns and midrange speakers and have excellent clarity and range. Combined with the powerful subwoofer the total output is 200 watts, with 70 watts in the two satellites (at 35 watts each) and 130 watts for the subwoofer.

Hi pv88, can you compare the sound of ProMedia 2.1 with your CA95 sound? I heard CA95 has really wonderful speaker system and people feel very good in front of it. Can ProMedia 2.1 be close to it? Btw, are you using LINE-OUT or headphone port to connect with your ProMedia 2.1? Thanks.

Overall, I would say that the CA95's speakers/soundboard give more realism to the sounds than the Klipsch speakers with the V-Piano, and, the CA95's speakers also add a lot of natural vibration to the keys while playing. The subwoofer with the Klipsch speakers causes vibrations too, but they are not quite as realistic as the CA95's soundboard. I would say that the Klipsch speakers tend to sound better at lower volume levels and I have them sitting directly on top of the V-Piano for the best results. I have placed the subwoofer to the far left side of the pedals (against the stand) under the piano, so that it might give off some vibrations to to the bass end of the keyboard. Speaker placement is always relative to how the player wants to perceive the sounds.

As for setup, the Klipsch speakers uses a cable that plugs into the headphone jack on the V-Piano.

I remember someone linked at this forum a video of a pianist from Roland comparing a Yamaha CLP 480 to a Roland HP-507. She played Debusy's Arabesque no. 2 on both. She said Roland was far more expressive. I generally agreed with her, she could do better dynamics. But what she didn't say is that the Yamaha sounded right (not great, it was a home camera or cell phone recording, for sure it wasn't professional), you couldn't be fouled by confusing it with a real piano but it was bright and ok. But the Roland, while nice in tone, was completely muffled. I think it's a shame Roland hasn't corrected this. Yes, I think it's not a brand sign of identity, it's a design error, they made a new series of HP piano and the error persists!

BTW, the video I tell about doesn't exist anymore. Pity! It was very educational.

Talking about another thing, from the videos I watched, the V-Piano Grand sounds great, not muffled at all. But it's price tag is absolutely unreachable for me. Maybe Roland doesn't correct this problem because they want to distinguish between their 1000-3000â‚¬ models and their 10000+ model?

To "fight" against this muffled sound my HP.305 has I use Grand Piano 3 tone. It's brighter. I don't like to tweak brilliance settings as it doesn't solve completely the problem and it adds, in my opinion, new ones such as a too harsh sound difficult to control but thanks for the suggestion.

@Pv88, thanks for your recommendation. I will have it in account for sure. Not now as I cannot play with a very high volume (neighbours...) but thank you anyway.

I enjoyed reading all this; there was this Roland something or other in our local piano store. And it was muffled to me, nor was it cheap. The lady in the shop said it sounded more like an acoustic than the others. Next door were the acoustics.

I enjoyed reading all this; there was this Roland something or other in our local piano store. And it was muffled to me, nor was it cheap. The lady in the shop said it sounded more like an acoustic than the others. Next door were the acoustics.

_________________________
"I don't play accurately - anyone can play accurately - but I play with wonderful expression. As far as the piano is concerned, sentiment is my forte. I keep science for Life."

And it was muffled to me, nor was it cheap. The lady in the shop said it sounded more like an acoustic than the others.

That's true! My HP-305 sounds impressive and very realistic from a certain distance (not from the player place). It sounds almost like a high quality piano (a Steinway, Bluthner, BÃ¶ssendorfer or alike), better than any Yamaha (IMHO). I think the bass and the treble are specially amazing. But from the player perspective, while not bad, its a bit plastic

Something this expensive should have speakers that sound accurate relative to how the manufacturer wants the piano to sound. Are some of you implying that when the manufacturer develops a model and plays a prototype and hears it through the speakers, they say "that's good enough, if the buyer wants better s/he can use headphones or buy speakers"?

Compared to the piano and its components, speakers aren't that expensive. There is no reason why the buyer should have to buy additional equipment to improve the sound of a piano at this level. We're not talking $500, 1000, or even $2000 pianos here. 3000 friggin bucks and you have to buy speakers? Bull$#!t.

There is no friggin' way that, after dropping $3000+ on a piano, I have any inclination to go buy equipment for it. In fact, I won't have any money for more equipment. If I do get it before Christmas, my kids will be lucky to have more than coal in their stockings. Crap, I don't even know where to get coal around here in environmentally safe anti-fracking New England (as it should be environmentally safe and anti-fracking). So, it'll be an apple or orange in the toe of the stocking, some school supplies, staff paper (oh, wait, this is a digital piano... does that make staff paper and pencils obsolete?), and maybe an issue of Mad Magazine or Skiing magazine.

But, I digress (up late/up early cuz I'm sick, feel like crap and can't sleep... I digress again), I will not believe for a second that a $3000 piano would have substandard speakers. Please tell me this thread is about the buyer's preference and perhaps being overly meticulous.

To get good sound you need good drivers in a good enclosure.A digital piano makes a TERRIBLE enclosure. (Have you EVER seen a decent speaker in a configuration that resembles that of a digital piano? Never!)

They're not all mediocre. The top end Yamaha Clavinovas with iAFC are very good indeed in my opinion. Most people seem to rate the Kawai CA93/95. Some of the Rolands have an issue with how they sound from the player's perspective - I certainly agree they sound muffled and lack clarity to the player. That was my experience anyway. But to condemn them all is unreasonable. I think if you spend the $3000 it is reasonable to expect something good. Not state-of-the-art obviously, but good.

I also agree that in principle it is crazy to have to consider adding amps/speakers to an above average console DP from one of the major manufacturers.

And finally, by default acoustic pianos do not sound muffled, not to my ears anyway - Roland is not imitating real life by making their DPs sound muffled.

Something this expensive should have speakers that sound accurate relative to how the manufacturer wants the piano to sound. Are some of you implying that when the manufacturer develops a model and plays a prototype and hears it through the speakers, they say "that's good enough, if the buyer wants better s/he can use headphones or buy speakers"?

Compared to the piano and its components, speakers aren't that expensive. There is no reason why the buyer should have to buy additional equipment to improve the sound of a piano at this level.

Speakers are in fact expensive, and good hi-fi speakers can cost thousands of dollars themselves.The sound of a digital piano is different from those of acoustic - then you are playing acoustics, hammers hit the strings and the sound is coming from different places all over the piano, depending on which string was hit, while a digital piano has three-amplified system at the best (except may be the most expensive grand-like pianos).So the sound of acoustic piano from player perspective is relatively hard to imitate using 2-4-6 speakers, while a piano sounds really good from other places.

Roland made improvements on its HP 5xx series adding the Sound Projection System from its V-piano. It is designed to imitate sound coming from there the key was hit.

It is still not ideal, but in fact HP-505 sounds much better with its speakers than previous higher model HP-307, although 307 is a little bit crispier and sounds slightly better through headphones. Initially making choice between these two models, I was more inclined to buy 505 model due to its speaker system, but finally decided for 507.

All digitals I've heard sounded better through headphones, it is not something about Roland.

About my HP-507 model, it should not be probably put very close to the wall, there should be a little space behind it, then it sounds OK for me.

Good rant, but as Mac says you missed the point. Or rather the inherent difficulty the designer has with the shape of a DP. I also find the HP50x sound missing something, but that may be personal preference.

During my recent "investigation" into DPs, I tried some Rolands, and they were all muffled. Not the V-piano, but several HP-50x models. As I've mentioned on here before, they sound like I'm listening to them from the next room.

The assistant said they were optimised for listening from further away. Whatever that means. Maybe I ought to get my arms stretched like THIS guy. "I wonder where, that Roland midrange has gone?"

I've also heard it said that people are a bit naive to expect decent quality sound output for $3000. Speakers are expensive etc. I'm sure this is true, but if this is the reason, then how do Kawai manage it? Their CA95 sound is absolutely brilliant, on a similarly priced instrument.

There shouldn't be a need, given $3000 spent on a new digital piano, to need more equipment in order to make it sound right for the person playing it. I just can't see it.

The quality of the speakers isn't necessarily the problem. It's more their position, and the fact that speakers in most DP face downward, towards the floor. Even the finest monitor speakers will sound muffled if you angle the output at the floor.

Yes, it sucks that you need to add external speakers to a $3000 piano. But that's just the way it is.A piano slab-box with a pair of speakers like this ...... cannot produce sound that compares to speakers like this:

We just just have to live with it.

BTW, I bought those speakers (and stands, not shown) and an A/V receiver to drive them, all used on Craig's List ... for $197. A pittance when added to a $3000 piano.

You know, if you listen to acoustic pianos on youtube played by competent players (some are very young; they all have Steinways or better) they sound terrible. Now that`s in a room, playing live. But when they`re recorded they sound soooo much better. Almost as good as a digital. I do not want an acoustic. Not now, not ever!! . . .

You know, if you listen to acoustic pianos on youtube played by competent players (some are very young; they all have Steinways or better) they sound terrible. Now that`s in a room, playing live. But when they`re recorded they sound soooo much better. Almost as good as a digital. I do not want an acoustic. Not now, not ever!! . . .

Your post makes no sense. First you say that the recordings sound "terrible", then you say that "when they're recorded they sound soooo (sic) much better".

Sorry. I explained that badly. The aforementioned live recordings were in rooms, concert halls, in front (usually) of people listening and the recording would be basic. The second case is where CDs or professionally recorded stuff is played of the same music employing people of the same calibre. There is an unexpectedly huge difference which I would not attribute entirely to the recording quality, but to the tuning of the instrument in use; perhaps also the acoustics.

Microphone placement makes an enormous difference. Then, much less usually, the quality of the microphone. Then, less still, the quality of the recording equipment. And of course, the matter of someone knowing what they're doing making the recording. But mostly it comes down to microphone placement.

I think that's what peterws is hearing, as well as the mediocre quality of the maintenance of the piano being played.....that makes an enormous difference too.

I went to Harrods a couple of days ago, to try out their Roland LX15 and HP-507. I have looked at them already, but I wanted to check that the muffled sound I experienced in the first store, wasn't random bad luck.I can confirm that these were also muffled, so its safe to say this is how they were designed.

However, I did notice something else interesting. When I play a digital piano in a shop, I tend not to turn it's volume up above half way. However, this time I did turn the volume up to full, and hey presto, the treble and midrange were all there, and it did sound really nice (albeit a bit too loud for comfort, in a shop). However, with the volume back down to half way, it was extreme mufflage again.

This seems odd, I haven't noticed the tone changing so significantly with volume on other makes of piano. However, on the LX15 and HP507, with the volume up to the top, I thought the sound was miles, miles better, and in fact would make them a real temptation, if the sound wasn't so muffled at lower volumes.

Anyone have any ideas why this might be the case? I wonder if anything could be done about it?